Occasionally eating fish is chronic exposure too. And larger doses vs chronic exposure could go either way as to which is worse. In the case of mercury, the body can filter out mercury, albeit very slowly, and very low levels have no noticeable effect.
(Now before you go on about the impossibility of everyone being rich compared to their peers, compare your level of wealth to that of the average person 400 years ago)
Liquid elemental mercury is actually hard to absorb by the body. It's chemically modified mercury, or mercury vapor, that are dangerous. Dimethyl mercury, for example, is fantastically dangerous stuff, and rapidly passes through latex, PVC, butyl, neoprene, and skin, and a drop of it can kill you. Meanwhile the mercury amalgam in my tooth fillings apparently is absorbed via vaporization and the lungs, and contributes about as much as occasionally eating fish, even though I have a few thousand mg of it in my teeth for decades.
I can confirm that a broken CF bulb is nasty. I had one break while hot, it stank to the high heavens and also gave me a headache. Had to ventilate the room for hours. Given that mercury is odorless (pdf), I suspect some other chemical. In any case, if the cold bulbs have a similar odor I think it would be very unlikely for someone to get mercury poisoning from these, and there is also the matter of the mercury emitted by coal power plants to consider.
Overall I am pleased with CF bulbs, but one day hope to build a DC circuit with LEDs and battery backup for my lights.
This is change we can believe in. That was the plan right?
Viva OBAMA!
To be fair, this is not change we can believe in, but rather change we can believe. Except it might not be change. How would we know? And it might even be something that was done in the interests of publishing information about the government, a trade of a milder tone for more information. Again, how would we know?
Given that the linked story is incredibly one-sided against the reporter yet their worst example is the rewording of a story to the same story with the same information, I'm guessing this is nothing more than the age-old observation that if you want people to talk to you you don't go and twist everything they say in the worst possible light.
He did go against his paper's ethics guidelines though, and while on an individual case I wouldn't have a problem with what he did, if government officials got used to talking to people who allowed them to review the story before publication, then they'd be less inclined to other reporters who don't offer them such favors. Therefore he should be punished for the greater good, and for violating his paper's ethics rules. Sometimes meaning well or having good results simply does not justify something.
It's an approximation. Maybe the order of magnitude will be off by 50%. Sure, mercury has more protons but on average the protons in it have less potential energy than free protons (ie, you can get energy by fusing protons into mercury), so I expect that to make up for some of that. Mainly, it's a jab at people who get terrified for no reason about anything to do with radioactivity or half-life.
You can't physically cram people any tighter, and fights are breaking out.
Oh, but you can pack people far closer together. And if you had a policy where anyone fighting had to exit the craft (parachute optional) then there wouldn't even be fighting. The fighting could also be reduced by any means that would reduce people's feeling of being treated unfairly, as people naturally get vicious if they feel they are being treated unfairly. Also anything that would reduce other sources of discomfort would reduce fights over unrelated discomforts as they are less likely to push them over the edge.
Personally, I wonder what would happen if the replaced some seats with bunk beds, and maybe for good measure add an inch of noise absorbing panels or noise cancellation speakers. I would greatly prefer this especially since I don't like sitting on a long trip. If you could fit in three bunks (may require rearranging the overhead luggage), it might even save space.
You are not one of the few people for whom obesity is well and truly an unavoidable medical condition. Put down the cheetos and mountain dew, you fat fuck, and go outside.
Neither is being tall... it's well-known that malnutrition will stunt your growth, as would certain hormone treatments. For what it's worth, a change in human nature did not result in the current wave of obesity, human nature doesn't change that quickly. Don't get me wrong, it can still be solved by strength of will, but human nature says few will choose that path.
Technically, no American president has been voted for by "most Americans" since large swaths of the people have been excluded from voting for various reasons (age, gender, race, or ethnicity, depending on the time period).
Methinks you forgot apathy/cynicism/disillusionment. There are more people now that don't vote not because they can't vote but because they can't be bothered.
You have the right to recline your chair. I have the right to move my legs, even if it constantly bumps your reclined chair. I have the right to drum my fingernails against the tray on your chair. I can always find an agreement with the person in front of me to restrict our use of our rights to increase our mutual comfort level.
Just because you have a right doesn't mean you must use it and damn anyone who is inconvenienced.
In America, if the law were enforced everyone would be in jail. This probably means that most of the laws are in fact terrible and should be repealed. I suspect that the primary purpose of those laws are so that annoying people can always be jailed for some reason or another. Either that or the bureaucrats are incompetent at updating obsolete laws and passing new ones.
Either way, in the long run people are likely to find that it is not only cheaper, but also safer, to deliver a package via a 5 pound drone rather than via a 5000 pound delivery truck controlled by a faulty meat-computer with poor reaction times.
Also it would suck if they decided to surgically remove your prosthesis and keep it in their evidence locker for a couple years until the trial proves you innocent, and then hopefully give it back. Things attached to you might be protected as your stuff, but I think it should be protected a little more at least in terms of what evidence they need before they take them and how long they can keep them.
190 tons of meat and blubber is nothing to sneeze at. If there were no protections, someone would turn them all into economy kitty food or whatever.
We protect things both for feel-good reasons and for economic reasons, so if whales had large economic value they might still have survived much like cows and chickens are doing well despite being tasty.
An unavoidable side effect of trusting less is that you trust less. In this case, ancient websites using outdated crypto, won't be trusted. Most of which already are no longer trusted due to expired certificates.
Bring it all back home. For all the hullabaloo about letting technology getting into "enemy hands", including export restrictions, the "let's just leave a bunch of military hardware in the Middle East" scenario was apparently never considered a risk.
That makes no sense. If we brought the equipment back, then we wouldn't need to buy shiny new equipment to replace it nor hire more soldiers to fight well-armed enemies. Think of all the jobs that would be lost by doing something as efficient as that!
As usual, the answer to the headline question is "no". No one wants to buy equipment they won't own; there's always the risk of the wrong person using the killswitch; the killswitch can easily be disabled by destroying the receiver so it wouldn't even fulfill its function. I could see killswitches finding use for prison or riot gear, and maybe to prevent tech from getting captured, but as a general rule the military will avoid them like if it were equipment which could all simultaneously stop functioning at a critical time.
Slashdot Mirror
Occasionally eating fish is chronic exposure too. And larger doses vs chronic exposure could go either way as to which is worse. In the case of mercury, the body can filter out mercury, albeit very slowly, and very low levels have no noticeable effect.
Q: What did the fish say when it bumped into a concrete wall?
A: Dam!
So everyone should be rich is your answer?
That sounds like an excellent idea!
(Now before you go on about the impossibility of everyone being rich compared to their peers, compare your level of wealth to that of the average person 400 years ago)
Liquid elemental mercury is actually hard to absorb by the body. It's chemically modified mercury, or mercury vapor, that are dangerous. Dimethyl mercury, for example, is fantastically dangerous stuff, and rapidly passes through latex, PVC, butyl, neoprene, and skin, and a drop of it can kill you. Meanwhile the mercury amalgam in my tooth fillings apparently is absorbed via vaporization and the lungs, and contributes about as much as occasionally eating fish, even though I have a few thousand mg of it in my teeth for decades.
I can confirm that a broken CF bulb is nasty. I had one break while hot, it stank to the high heavens and also gave me a headache. Had to ventilate the room for hours. Given that mercury is odorless (pdf), I suspect some other chemical. In any case, if the cold bulbs have a similar odor I think it would be very unlikely for someone to get mercury poisoning from these, and there is also the matter of the mercury emitted by coal power plants to consider.
Overall I am pleased with CF bulbs, but one day hope to build a DC circuit with LEDs and battery backup for my lights.
This is change we can believe in. That was the plan right?
Viva OBAMA!
To be fair, this is not change we can believe in, but rather change we can believe. Except it might not be change. How would we know? And it might even be something that was done in the interests of publishing information about the government, a trade of a milder tone for more information. Again, how would we know?
Given that the linked story is incredibly one-sided against the reporter yet their worst example is the rewording of a story to the same story with the same information, I'm guessing this is nothing more than the age-old observation that if you want people to talk to you you don't go and twist everything they say in the worst possible light.
He did go against his paper's ethics guidelines though, and while on an individual case I wouldn't have a problem with what he did, if government officials got used to talking to people who allowed them to review the story before publication, then they'd be less inclined to other reporters who don't offer them such favors. Therefore he should be punished for the greater good, and for violating his paper's ethics rules. Sometimes meaning well or having good results simply does not justify something.
It's an approximation. Maybe the order of magnitude will be off by 50%. Sure, mercury has more protons but on average the protons in it have less potential energy than free protons (ie, you can get energy by fusing protons into mercury), so I expect that to make up for some of that. Mainly, it's a jab at people who get terrified for no reason about anything to do with radioactivity or half-life.
Just remember, mercury has a half-life of about 10^28 million years or longer, so don't expect it to just go away.
You can't physically cram people any tighter, and fights are breaking out.
Oh, but you can pack people far closer together. And if you had a policy where anyone fighting had to exit the craft (parachute optional) then there wouldn't even be fighting. The fighting could also be reduced by any means that would reduce people's feeling of being treated unfairly, as people naturally get vicious if they feel they are being treated unfairly. Also anything that would reduce other sources of discomfort would reduce fights over unrelated discomforts as they are less likely to push them over the edge.
Personally, I wonder what would happen if the replaced some seats with bunk beds, and maybe for good measure add an inch of noise absorbing panels or noise cancellation speakers. I would greatly prefer this especially since I don't like sitting on a long trip. If you could fit in three bunks (may require rearranging the overhead luggage), it might even save space.
You are not one of the few people for whom obesity is well and truly an unavoidable medical condition. Put down the cheetos and mountain dew, you fat fuck, and go outside.
Neither is being tall... it's well-known that malnutrition will stunt your growth, as would certain hormone treatments. For what it's worth, a change in human nature did not result in the current wave of obesity, human nature doesn't change that quickly. Don't get me wrong, it can still be solved by strength of will, but human nature says few will choose that path.
Using cutting-edge techniques, Dr Louhelainen was able to extract 126-year-old DNA from the material
I hear Jack the Ripper also used cutting edge techniques.
Technically, no American president has been voted for by "most Americans" since large swaths of the people have been excluded from voting for various reasons (age, gender, race, or ethnicity, depending on the time period).
Methinks you forgot apathy/cynicism/disillusionment. There are more people now that don't vote not because they can't vote but because they can't be bothered.
You have the right to recline your chair. I have the right to move my legs, even if it constantly bumps your reclined chair. I have the right to drum my fingernails against the tray on your chair. I can always find an agreement with the person in front of me to restrict our use of our rights to increase our mutual comfort level.
Just because you have a right doesn't mean you must use it and damn anyone who is inconvenienced.
And I think that incumbents have things way too easy for re-election.
In America, if the law were enforced everyone would be in jail. This probably means that most of the laws are in fact terrible and should be repealed. I suspect that the primary purpose of those laws are so that annoying people can always be jailed for some reason or another. Either that or the bureaucrats are incompetent at updating obsolete laws and passing new ones.
Either way, in the long run people are likely to find that it is not only cheaper, but also safer, to deliver a package via a 5 pound drone rather than via a 5000 pound delivery truck controlled by a faulty meat-computer with poor reaction times.
In the near future those cease and desist letters will be sent via drones.
They're an inspiration to future Darwin award candidates.
Also it would suck if they decided to surgically remove your prosthesis and keep it in their evidence locker for a couple years until the trial proves you innocent, and then hopefully give it back. Things attached to you might be protected as your stuff, but I think it should be protected a little more at least in terms of what evidence they need before they take them and how long they can keep them.
I'd rather live in a mixed community, one where I'd encounter lots of different types of people on an everyday basis.
But different people are so annoying! :-p Seriously though, it would be nice to have a bunch of friends and peers in the neighborhood.
190 tons of meat and blubber is nothing to sneeze at. If there were no protections, someone would turn them all into economy kitty food or whatever.
We protect things both for feel-good reasons and for economic reasons, so if whales had large economic value they might still have survived much like cows and chickens are doing well despite being tasty.
An unavoidable side effect of trusting less is that you trust less. In this case, ancient websites using outdated crypto, won't be trusted. Most of which already are no longer trusted due to expired certificates.
NASA ... NSA ... it's just one letter off, and it explains mysteriously launched spy satellites. /paranoia
Bring it all back home. For all the hullabaloo about letting technology getting into "enemy hands", including export restrictions, the "let's just leave a bunch of military hardware in the Middle East" scenario was apparently never considered a risk.
That makes no sense. If we brought the equipment back, then we wouldn't need to buy shiny new equipment to replace it nor hire more soldiers to fight well-armed enemies. Think of all the jobs that would be lost by doing something as efficient as that!
I guess I'm going to have my kids buy all the in-app purchases from now on.
As usual, the answer to the headline question is "no". No one wants to buy equipment they won't own; there's always the risk of the wrong person using the killswitch; the killswitch can easily be disabled by destroying the receiver so it wouldn't even fulfill its function. I could see killswitches finding use for prison or riot gear, and maybe to prevent tech from getting captured, but as a general rule the military will avoid them like if it were equipment which could all simultaneously stop functioning at a critical time.